[Unfair Competition / Trade Secrets] Osaka District Court, Reiwa 5 (Wa) 2681
Article information
Article type: Case note
Categories: Unfair competition law
Topics: Trade secrets
First published on this website: 2026-10-07
Display and classification checked: 2026-10-07
[Unfair Competition / Trade Secrets] Osaka District Court, Reiwa 5 (Wa) 2681
* “For a confidentiality clause to be valid, there must be trade secrets or other information deserving protection”!!
⇒ NDA provisions should be drafted so that their scope is construed as extending beyond “trade secrets” under the Unfair Competition Prevention Act.
* No management as secret ⇒ No liability in general tort either.
(Excerpt from the judgment, translated)
For a confidentiality clause to be valid, trade secrets or other information deserving protection must exist. However, the copied information at issue lacks, at a minimum, management as secret and usefulness, and the document data at issue is not highly confidential. Neither therefore qualifies as trade secrets or other information deserving protection. Defendant P2 signed and sealed the undertaking upon joining the company and the confidentiality undertaking, but the plaintiff never explained their specific contents to him. He should not be subjected to unnecessary and excessive confidentiality obligations on their basis. Accordingly, P2 did not breach a confidentiality obligation by acquiring the copied information or providing the document data.
... In light of the information-management system then in place for information within the plaintiff's operation-management system (including the copied information and document data), both sets of information lacked management as secret and did not constitute “trade secrets” under Article 2(6) of the Unfair Competition Prevention Act. Nor are there circumstances in this case requiring consideration, in relation to acts involving such information, of an interest separate from those protected by that Act.
Accordingly, P2 committed no unlawful act, and the defendants' alleged joint tort, premised on such an act, is not established either.
https://lnkd.in/gJyr8rym
Original article (2025-11-27):
https://lnkd.in/guFb4Rkj
Update history
Content changes and display maintenance are recorded separately.
2026-10-07: First published from the original LinkedIn post; categories, article information, and consultation navigation added.
